The Marriage of A'isha and Apologetic Myopia

[Debater Slayer]

Note: I decided to divide some paragraphs into two paragraphs or more for ease of reading. Even though I think some ideas flowed well as one paragraph, some of the paragraphs were so long that I decided to split them instead.

First off, I would like to clarify that I'm not one of the supporters of the view that A'isha was raped if we go by the cultural and marital standards of the time period she lived in. Aside from the fact that no majorly scholarly authentic historical accounts of her life that I have ever read say that she suffered from any problems that would indicate sexual abuse, Muhammad's enemies at the time would have also used the marriage against him had it been uncommon for someone to marry someone that young at his time, but they didn't.

I'm clarifying the above because I personally think that it is unjustified to conclude that she was a victim of child sexual abuse when she went on to live a life that still has no majorly scholarly authentic accounts of suffering from the effects of such. I'm open to changing my current view in light of evidence; it's just that I currently think it would be hasty to conclude that she was sexually abused as a child unless we talk about her marriage in isolation of cultural and historical context.

That said, one of the things that baffle me is when I see some people attack criticism of A'isha's marriage due to her age according to some of the most widely accepted Islamic views as "slander" and "misinformation." I think it is indeed the sign of unfortunate dismissal and the myopic if not outright blind political correctness that accompanies Islamic apologetics in many cases.

When millions of Muslims unwaveringly assert that A'isha was no older than nine or ten years old when Muhammad "consummated" his marriage with her yet some non-Muslims claim that it is "slanderous," "hateful," etc., to point out that belief, I can't help but wonder to what depths intellectual bankruptcy can sink so as to allow people to so readily dismiss viewpoints that they disagree with even if said viewpoints are based on texts that are widely considered authentic by many Muslims and Islamic scholars.

We have, for example, the two most authoritative hadith books in Sunni Islam, Bukhari and Muslim. This is some of what they have to say about A'isha's age at the time of her marriage to Muhammad:

Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3894) and Muslim (1422) It was narrated from her (may Allah be pleased with her) that she said: I used to play with dolls in the presence of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and I had friends who would play with me. When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) entered they would hide themselves and he would call them to come and play with me.

Given that most Muslims consider Muhammad to be a moral role model (with many Muslims considering him a perfect moral example), I can't help but wonder how harmful it can be to assume that what he did 1,400 years ago is acceptable to do now. A middle-aged man marrying a girl who was still playing with dolls—and that, again, is according to one of the two most authoritative hadith books in Sunni Islam, the sect of Islam that makes up the significant majority of Muslims.

This is from the other most-authoritative Sunni Islamic hadith book, Muslim:

Muslim (1422) narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married her when she was seven years old and she was taken to him as a bride when she was nine years old, and she took her dolls with her. He died when she was eighteen years old.

And we have more support in one of the major Sunni Islamic views for the marriage based on the view that A'isha was indeed nine years old at the time of the "consummation" of the marriage:

The fact that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) when she was nine years old is nothing strange. It is well-known that the age at which girls reach puberty varies according to race and environment. In hot regions girls reach puberty earlier, whereas in cold polar regions puberty may be delayed until the age of twenty-one years.

At-Tirmidhi said: ‘Aa’ishah said: When a girl reaches the age of nine years, she is a woman.

Sunan at-Tirmidhi (2/409)

Imam ash-Shaafa‘i said: In Yemen I saw many girls aged nine who had reached puberty.

Now, I think it is definitely worth pointing out that most Muslims, at least most Muslims I know, would never allow their daughters to marry at nine or ten years of age. Like most places in the world, the age I'm aware most Muslims I know agree is the minimum age for marriage is 18-20. While I do believe that A'isha's marriage was nothing extraordinary at her time, to say that it is also acceptable for girls to marry at that age today strikes me as outright support for child rape and sexual exploitation of children.

The fact that A'isha's age at the time of her marriage was so young when the marriage was to a man considered by millions of people to be the greatest moral example in the history of humanity seems to me to be more than a little problematic, exploitable, and prone to solidifying and propagating misconceptions about the age of consent for girls.

I haven't mentioned the website from which I took the above quotes yet. Someone might ask which Islamophobic, anti-Islamic website I took this stuff from. I intentionally saved it for last to make a point. Here it is:

Refutation of the lie that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah when she was 18 years old

Yes, that's the title of the link; it calls one of the apologetic arguments a "lie." One more tidbit about the link, IslamQA: it states that its general supervisor is Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid. This is him according to Wikipedia:

Muhammad Saalih Al-Munajjid (محمد صالح المنجد) (born 1960 or 12/30/1380 AH) is an Islamic scholar known for founding the websiteIslamQA.info, which provides answers to questions in line with the Salafi school of thought.[1] Al Jazeera indicates that Al-Munajjid is considered one of respected scholars in the Salafi movement.[2] IslamQA.info is one of the most popular websites providing the Salafi perspective and is (as of November 2015) according to Alexa.com the world's most popular website on the topic of Islam generally (apart from the website of an Islamic bank).[3][4]

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Al-Munajjid

Of course, someone might argue that the Salafi school of thought doesn't comprise the entirety of Islam, and that would be absolutely true. However, I highlighted in red a part I found interesting above.

The IslamQA link is not the first instance of my reading or hearing strong assertions with quotes from authoritative Islamic texts among the majority of Sunni scholars stating that A'isha was nine or ten years old when Muhammad "consummated" his marriage with her. Like it, hate it, oppose it, support it, or don't even care about it, that view is held and supported by millions of Muslims and many Islamic scholars, and it seems to me that apologetics is not going to change that.

I'm interested to hear thoughts on this subject, be they in agreement or disagreement, or possibly just neutral.

 

[Lyndon]

There are those that would argue there are no respected scholars in the salafist movement??? In any case its looked at as pretty right wing conservative, even for Muslims.

 

[Debater Slayer]

There are those that would argue there are no respected scholars in the salafist movement???

Based on what criteria do they decide who is or isn't "respected"?

Also, not all Sunni Muslims who believe A'isha's marriage was consummated at nine or ten years of age identify as Salafists.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

That said, one of the things that baffle me is when I see some people attack criticsismof A'isha's marriage due to her age according to some of the most widely accepted Islamic views as "slander" and "misinformation." I think it is indeed the sign of unfortunate dismissal and the myopic if not outright blind political correctness that accompanies Islamic apologetics in many cases.

Attacking it as slander and misinformation may well be technically incorrect. Attacking many of these instances as agenda-driven demagoguery is not. Again, from Wikipedia: Aisha; Age at marriage:

Aisha's age at the time she was married to Muhammad has been of interest since the earliest days of Islam, and references to her age by early historians are frequent. According to Sunni scriptural Hadith sources, Aisha was six or seven years old when she was married to Muhammad with the marriage not being consummated until she had reached puberty at the age of nine or ten years old. For example, Sahih al-Bukhari states:

Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:64​

Some traditional sources disagree. Ibn Hisham wrote in his biography of Muhammad that she may have been ten years old at the consummation. Ibn Khallikan, as well as Ibn Sa'd al-Baghdadi citing Hisham ibn Urwah, record that she was nine years old at marriage, and twelve at consummation. Sadakat Kadri points out that the recording of Aisha's age by Ibn Sa'd and Bukhari (though the hadith was Sahih) came a couple of centuries after the Prophet's death. Child marriage was not uncommon in many places at the time, Arabia included. It often served political purposes, and Aisha's marriage to Muhammad would have had a political connotation.

Muslim authors who calculate Aisha's age based on the more detailed information available about her sister Asma estimate that she was over thirteen and perhaps between seventeen and nineteen at the time of her marriage. Muhammad Niknam Arabshahi, an Iranian Islamic scholar and historian, has considered six different approaches to determining Aisha'a age and concluded that she was engaged in her late teens. Using the age of Fatimah as a reference point, the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement scholar Muhammad Ali has estimated that Aisha was over ten years old at the time of marriage and over fifteen at the time of its consummation.

American historian Denise Spellberg has reviewed Islamic literature on Aisha's virginity, age at marriage and age when the marriage was consummated and speculates that Aisha's youth might have been exaggerated to exclude any doubt about her virginity. Spellberg states, "Aisha's age is a major pre-occupation in Ibn Sa'd where her marriage varies between six and seven; nine seems constant as her age at the marriage's consummation." She notes one exception in Ibn Hisham's biography of the Prophet, which suggests the age of consummation may have been when Aisha was age 10, summarizing her review with the note that "these specific references to the bride's age reinforce Aisha's pre-menarcheal status and, implicitly, her virginity. They also suggest the variability of Aisha's age in the historical record." Early Muslims regarded Aisha's youth as demonstrating her virginity and therefore her suitability as a bride of Muhammad. This issue of her virginity was of great importance to those who supported Aisha's position in the debate of the succession to Muhammad. These supporters considered that as Muhammad's only virgin wife, Aisha was divinely intended for him, and therefore the most credible regarding the debate.​

Given the importance associated with virginity (so, too, in Christianity) I see no reason to presume consummation at the age of ten and even less reason to disingenuously attack Muhammad for child abuse.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Attacking it as slander and misinformation may well be technically incorrect. Attacking many of these instances as agenda-driven demagoguery is not.

I agree. It's also quite easy to isolate distant historical events from their context and make them out to be something they're not.

I think denying or intentionally obscuring facts is irresponsible at best regardless of which side it comes from. As long as certain facts are acknowledged, I can respect that people are going to see things differently.

Again, from Wikipedia: Aisha; Age at marriage:

Aisha's age at the time she was married to Muhammad has been of interest since the earliest days of Islam, and references to her age by early historians are frequent. According to Sunni scriptural Hadith sources, Aisha was six or seven years old when she was married to Muhammad with the marriage not being consummated until she had reached puberty at the age of nine or ten years old. For example, Sahih al-Bukhari states:

Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:64​

Some traditional sources disagree. Ibn Hisham wrote in his biography of Muhammad that she may have been ten years old at the consummation. Ibn Khallikan, as well as Ibn Sa'd al-Baghdadi citing Hisham ibn Urwah, record that she was nine years old at marriage, and twelve at consummation. Sadakat Kadri points out that the recording of Aisha's age by Ibn Sa'd and Bukhari (though the hadith was Sahih) came a couple of centuries after the Prophet's death. Child marriage was not uncommon in many places at the time, Arabia included. It often served political purposes, and Aisha's marriage to Muhammad would have had a political connotation.

Muslim authors who calculate Aisha's age based on the more detailed information available about her sister Asma estimate that she was over thirteen and perhaps between seventeen and nineteen at the time of her marriage. Muhammad Niknam Arabshahi, an Iranian Islamic scholar and historian, has considered six different approaches to determining Aisha'a age and concluded that she was engaged in her late teens. Using the age of Fatimah as a reference point, the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement scholar Muhammad Ali has estimated that Aisha was over ten years old at the time of marriage and over fifteen at the time of its consummation.

American historian Denise Spellberg has reviewed Islamic literature on Aisha's virginity, age at marriage and age when the marriage was consummated and speculates that Aisha's youth might have been exaggerated to exclude any doubt about her virginity. Spellberg states, "Aisha's age is a major pre-occupation in Ibn Sa'd where her marriage varies between six and seven; nine seems constant as her age at the marriage's consummation." She notes one exception in Ibn Hisham's biography of the Prophet, which suggests the age of consummation may have been when Aisha was age 10, summarizing her review with the note that "these specific references to the bride's age reinforce Aisha's pre-menarcheal status and, implicitly, her virginity. They also suggest the variability of Aisha's age in the historical record." Early Muslims regarded Aisha's youth as demonstrating her virginity and therefore her suitability as a bride of Muhammad. This issue of her virginity was of great importance to those who supported Aisha's position in the debate of the succession to Muhammad. These supporters considered that as Muhammad's only virgin wife, Aisha was divinely intended for him, and therefore the most credible regarding the debate.​

Given the importance associated with virginity (so, too, in Christianity) I see no reason to presume consummation at the age of ten and even less reason to disingenuously attack Muhammad for child abuse.

As I mentioned (and as the excerpt from al-Bukhari in your link indicates), some authoritative Islamic texts like the sahihs of Bukhari and Muslim state she was nine-ten years old at the time of consummation. I think that regardless of what one thinks her age was, it is a fact that a widely supported view (by many Muslims and Islamic scholars alike) states that she was so young.

As for the child abuse argument, I think the cultural context was so different back then that trying to take things at face value and apply our current standards to them may be simplistic at best. I believe there's much more to the question than "Did Muhammad marry a nine-year-old or not?"

 

[lovesong]

I agree that we need to look at these things in cultural and historical context, but that doesn't necessarily make them ok. Just as we would look at Chinese foot binding, even within its cultural context, and probably agree that it was mistreatment or even cruelty, we can look at A'isha's treatment much the same way. Yes it was the norm, but it doesn't make it any less abusive. Slavery used to be the norm worldwide, but we all agree that's no excuse for the mistreatment of slaves. Just because mistreatment or abuse is the norm does not make it any less harmful. I'm not flat out saying she was abused, but I do believe that the treatment of young girls as property, or even as less than their male counterparts, is damaging to the psyche. As far as their sexual relationship, I do not know how the mind and body can be effected when someone so young has sex with someone much older, so I draw no firm conclusion on this.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Just because mistreatment or abuse is the norm does not make it any less harmful. I'm not flat out saying she was abused, but ...

... but (a) that is precisely what you're suggesting, and (b) I would be very surprised if you much of anything about societal norms in 7th century CE Arabia.

 

[lovesong]

... but (a) that is precisely what you're suggesting, and (b) I would be very surprised if you much of anything about societal norms in 7th century CE Arabia.

I'm saying it is possible that she wasn't abused, but if she was, it being a societal norm does not dull the fact that it was abuse.

Again, you continue to cherry pick posts and insult the intelligence of others, the latter is completely unessesary and very rude. I am aware that you are very knowledgable about certain topics, but when you display that knowledge by putting others down you loose credibility and respect. From this point on I will not reply to any post from you that includes this belittling language.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I'm saying it is possible that she wasn't abused, but if she was, it being a societal norm does not dull the fact that it was abuse.

It seemed to me that you were saying ...

..., we can look at A'isha's treatment much the same way. Yes it was the norm, but it doesn't make it any less abusive.

... suggesting that you know a good deal more about both "Aisha's treatment" and "the norm" than most of us here.

 

[lovesong]

It seemed to me that you were saying ...

​

... suggesting that you know a good deal more about both "Aisha's treatment" and "the norm" than most of us here.

Many people throughout these A'isha threads have commented on how it was not uncommon for girls to marry that young. I would assume, given the little I do know, that women were treated as less than men or as property of the husband. I would also assume that their sexual relationship did not begin with "the talk" and a long conversation about whether she understood the implications and felt ready. At bare minimum, simply treating women as property of the husband or significantly less than them could stand in as an example of how something being the norm does not justify the harm it causes to those effected. No advanced knowledge needed

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Many people throughout these A'isha threads have commented on how it was not uncommon for girls to marry that young.

Many people? Could you provide perhaps three examples and suggest the scholarship upon which these comments were based?

 

[lovesong]

Many people? Could you provide perhaps three examples and suggest the scholarship upon which these comments were based?

I believe it was in every A'isha thread in the last couple of days, but what point are you trying to make? If these people are correct and she was married off that young, my point is still relevant that the norm does not justify the harm. If they are wrong and marrying this young was not the norm, than you can't even try to use the "but look in historical context!" defence.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I believe it was in every A'isha thread in the last couple of days,...

I'll take that as a "no." Goodnight.

 

[lovesong]

I'll take that as a "no." Goodnight.

OP: Historical context justifies the marriage.
Me: No it doesn't.
You: Unless you have references to back up that young marriage was the norm you have no place commenting.
What sense does this make? Challenge the OP's references, not mine.
Goodnight, and thank you again for yet another headache.

 

[Orbit]

Note: I decided to divide some paragraphs into two paragraphs or more for ease of reading. Even though I think some ideas flowed well as one paragraph, some of the paragraphs were so long that I decided to split them instead.

First off, I would like to clarify that I'm not one of the supporters of the view that A'isha was raped if we go by the cultural and marital standards of the time period she lived in. Aside from the fact that no majorly scholarly authentic historical accounts of her life that I have ever read say that she suffered from any problems that would indicate sexual abuse, Muhammad's enemies at the time would have also used the marriage against him had it been uncommon for someone to marry someone that young at his time, but they didn't.

I'm clarifying the above because I personally think that it is unjustified to conclude that she was a victim of child sexual abuse when she went on to live a life that still has no majorly scholarly authentic accounts of suffering from the effects of such. I'm open to changing my current view in light of evidence; it's just that I currently think it would be hasty to conclude that she was sexually abused as a child unless we talk about her marriage in isolation of cultural and historical context.

That said, one of the things that baffle me is when I see some people attack criticism of A'isha's marriage due to her age according to some of the most widely accepted Islamic views as "slander" and "misinformation." I think it is indeed the sign of unfortunate dismissal and the myopic if not outright blind political correctness that accompanies Islamic apologetics in many cases.

When millions of Muslims unwaveringly assert that A'isha was no older than nine or ten years old when Muhammad "consummated" his marriage with her yet some non-Muslims claim that it is "slanderous," "hateful," etc., to point out that belief, I can't help but wonder to what depths intellectual bankruptcy can sink so as to allow people to so readily dismiss viewpoints that they disagree with even if said viewpoints are based on texts that are widely considered authentic by many Muslims and Islamic scholars.

We have, for example, the two most authoritative hadith books in Sunni Islam, Bukhari and Muslim. This is some of what they have to say about A'isha's age at the time of her marriage to Muhammad:



Given that most Muslims consider Muhammad to be a moral role model (with many Muslims considering him a perfect moral example), I can't help but wonder how harmful it can be to assume that what he did 1,400 years ago is acceptable to do now. A middle-aged man marrying a girl who was still playing with dolls—and that, again, is according to one of the two most authoritative hadith books in Sunni Islam, the sect of Islam that makes up the significant majority of Muslims.

This is from the other most-authoritative Sunni Islamic hadith book, Muslim:



And we have more support in one of the major Sunni Islamic views for the marriage based on the view that A'isha was indeed nine years old at the time of the "consummation" of the marriage:



Now, I think it is definitely worth pointing out that most Muslims, at least most Muslims I know, would never allow their daughters to marry at nine or ten years of age. Like most places in the world, the age I'm aware most Muslims I know agree is the minimum age for marriage is 18-20. While I do believe that A'isha's marriage was nothing extraordinary at her time, to say that it is also acceptable for girls to marry at that age today strikes me as outright support for child rape and sexual exploitation of children.

The fact that A'isha's age at the time of her marriage was so young when the marriage was to a man considered by millions of people to be the greatest moral example in the history of humanity seems to me to be more than a little problematic, exploitable, and prone to solidifying and propagating misconceptions about the age of consent for girls.

I haven't mentioned the website from which I took the above quotes yet. Someone might ask which Islamophobic, anti-Islamic website I took this stuff from. I intentionally saved it for last to make a point. Here it is:

Refutation of the lie that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah when she was 18 years old

Yes, that's the title of the link; it calls one of the apologetic arguments a "lie." One more tidbit about the link, IslamQA: it states that its general supervisor is Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid. This is him according to Wikipedia:



Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Al-Munajjid

Of course, someone might argue that the Salafi school of thought doesn't comprise the entirety of Islam, and that would be absolutely true. However, I highlighted in red a part I found interesting above.

The IslamQA link is not the first instance of my reading or hearing strong assertions with quotes from authoritative Islamic texts among the majority of Sunni scholars stating that A'isha was nine or ten years old when Muhammad "consummated" his marriage with her. Like it, hate it, oppose it, support it, or don't even care about it, that view is held and supported by millions of Muslims and many Islamic scholars, and it seems to me that apologetics is not going to change that.

I'm interested to hear thoughts on this subject, be they in agreement or disagreement, or possibly just neutral.

My thought is that sex with a child is always wrong, the man knew it was wrong, but patriarchy allowed it to happen.

 

[Lyndon]

As distasteful as child marriage is to us today, its kind of hard to apply 21st century morality to the 7th century, it seems the 7th century Arabs, and the pre AD Jews, as well as many other cultures around the world were not aware enough to consider it wrong, was it wrong for the young girls, probably, but did it appear wrong to the men of the day, probably not.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I agree that we need to look at these things in cultural and historical context, but that doesn't necessarily make them ok. Just as we would look at Chinese foot binding, even within its cultural context, and probably agree that it was mistreatment or even cruelty, we can look at A'isha's treatment much the same way. Yes it was the norm, but it doesn't make it any less abusive. Slavery used to be the norm worldwide, but we all agree that's no excuse for the mistreatment of slaves. Just because mistreatment or abuse is the norm does not make it any less harmful. I'm not flat out saying she was abused, but I do believe that the treatment of young girls as property, or even as less than their male counterparts, is damaging to the psyche. As far as their sexual relationship, I do not know how the mind and body can be effected when someone so young has sex with someone much older, so I draw no firm conclusion on this.

I agree with you that historical and cultural context don't necessarily make certain practices okay and with your post in general.

In this case, when looking at the question of whether A'isha was subjected to child sexual abuse, my primary focus is on the accounts of the life of A'isha and how she lived her life after her marriage to Muhammad. If we have no clear historical accounts that she suffered from the effects typically resulting from child sexual abuse, do you think it is logically justified to conclude that she was indeed sexually abused as a child?

The main reason I'm personally hesitant to say that A'isha was sexually abused as a child is that child sexual abuse victims are traumatized and suffer through extreme hardships as a result. If we can't say that we have solid historical accounts of A'isha suffering the same, how can we say with confidence that she was sexually abused as a child?

I'm asking these questions for discussion, not rhetorically. This is one of the issues that have always elicited conflicted thoughts from me, due to the questions I posed above in addition to the significant cultural differences between now and A'isha's time. I see this as far from being a black-and-white issue.

OP: Historical context justifies the marriage.
Me: No it doesn't.

That's not exactly an accurate summary of my position, though. Nowhere did I say "justify"; what I'm saying is that the culture back then was different and so it wasn't completely out of the ordinary for girls to marry at an extremely young age. That's not necessarily a statement about whether or not it was "justified"; just an explanation as to why I'm not personally convinced by the arguments that tackle the issue in a "This was child rape no matter what the cultural context was!" manner. As I said, I think this is far from being a black-and-white issue.

The main and possibly only thing that makes me on the fence about this is, as I mentioned above, the lack of clear historical accounts of A'isha suffering from the effects typically resulting from being subjected to child sexual abuse. If I see such accounts, I will definitely see this issue differently. It's not like I view Muhammad as a paragon of morality or something and I'm trying to defend his actions as a result. (I'm not; this is primarily an issue of consistency and accuracy for me.)

 

[Debater Slayer]

My thought is that sex with a child is always wrong, the man knew it was wrong, but patriarchy allowed it to happen.

I'm not sure that Muhammad knew it was wrong. Given the kind of culture he lived in, I don't see it as far-fetched that he probably thought he was doing something morally acceptable. We're talking about the same person who thought that sex with one's slaves was morally acceptable, among other things. That's the sort of thing that was accepted back then.

I agree that patriarchy allowed A'isha's marriage to happen, and I also think that there were many other indications that the culture of that time was severely patriarchal and sexist.

 

[MD]

A child is a child. A child may not have the intellectual capacity to understand what is happening, even when it comes to sex. A child may or may not feel it was abused, but nonetheless they were because it does not have the capacity to give consent. The accounts of the history of this child were written by men centuries after the death of this leader, and who were heavily partial to this leader. Of course the accounts will be heavily biased in his favor.

If we criticize war, rape, genocide and colonialism, then we must criticize child abuse. If one cannot criticize the act of abuse committed by Mohammed and play it off as some 'cultural remnant' then we have no foot to criticize any despot or ill in history. If morality is purely contextual it loses all its worth and there were no evil or good men. There were no evil or good acts. Nothing is wrong with this view.

 

[Debater Slayer]

A child is a child. A child cannot have the intellectual capacity to understand what is happening, even when it comes to sex. A child may or may not feel it was abused, but nonetheless they were because it does not have the capacity to give consent. The accounts of the history of this child were written by men centuries after the death of this leader, and who were heavily partial to this leader. Of course the accounts will be heavily biased in his favor.

If we criticize war, rape, genocide and colonialism, then we must criticize child abuse. If one cannot criticize the act of abuse committed by Mohammed and play it off as some 'cultural remnant' then we have no foot to criticize any despot or ill in history. If morality is purely cultural it loses all its worth and there were no evil or good men. There were no evil or good acts. Nothing is wrong with this view.

There are non-Muslim historians who have written about Islam, as you probably know. Don't you think many of them would talk about A'isha's suffering the effects of child sexual abuse if she indeed suffered them?

In the case of someone like, say, Genghis Khan, we have ample evidence that he was a bloodthirsty, murderous warlord who led mass killings and rape, but when it comes to A'isha's marriage, do we have similar evidence that she showed signs of trauma after marrying Muhammad?